From the official release:
As president, my plan would have produced a budget that was cut, capped and balanced – not one that opens the door to higher taxes and puts defense cuts on the table. President Obama’s leadership failure has pushed the economy to the brink at the eleventh hour and 59th minute. While I appreciate the extraordinarily difficult situation President Obama’s lack of leadership has placed Republican Members of Congress in, I personally cannot support this deal.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:31 am
So Romney is on record supporting default.
Check.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:35 am
Finger in the wind once again. It’s too late, Mitt. The deal is done.
On another note, I look forward to hearing his supporters try to spin this, after bashing Palin for 4 days for opposing Boehner’s bill.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:35 am
More on this at Politico:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/174673-romney-opposes-debt-ceiling-compromise
August 1st, 2011 at 9:36 am
You guys asked for Romney to take a position. Now, let’s see if my prediction holds true and people attack him just as much anyway.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:36 am
He had be saying this for a long time, how many times does a man have to repeat himself? Some people will never be satisfied.
*Sigh* I’m past convincing you folks.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:37 am
By the way, Boehner is now on record claiming he got 98% of what he wanted. Thanks, John. Thanks to you, the GOP now owns the bill!
August 1st, 2011 at 9:37 am
(correction) *He had been…
August 1st, 2011 at 9:39 am
4
They are just getting a little desperate. Ames and Iowa are looking more and more like a joke. Perry is putting off his announcement until the end of the month. The chances to catch Mitt are getting slimmer by the day, so naturally they try to slime him with Boehner and Obama’s mess. Idiotic statements like “Romney supports default” are some of many of the mentally unhinged things the supporters of sinking candidates will say.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:39 am
“98% of what he wanted…”
Well let’s see if the politicians take a Yasser Arafat approach.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:41 am
Romneybots must be all throwing up by now.
Mitt comes down on the side of Palin on the issue. How is that possible?
August 1st, 2011 at 9:42 am
For anyone that might know me, I start working again tomorrow. After two months of searching for work. Not bad really, my new job is actually better than my previous one in every single way.
Then again Canadian economy is doing a lot better than the US economy, even though we are more socialistic and liberal than the US. But, our tax on business is much much lower than the US.
Maybe US can learn a thing or two about Canadian economy.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:43 am
Does Romney EVER say the wrong thing? This guy is seriously KILLING Obama over the past couple of months with Ads and comments like this. Not voting for him in the primaries, but glad he continues to hammer away at BHO.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:44 am
I don’t think I can afford being a political junkie, I better get off this addiction, least I don’t pass my three month probation period.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:45 am
Count me as a Romney supporter publicly disagreeing with my candidate on this one… I don’t really understand his stance on this, or how he’s handled it politically. Why wait until a deal has been reached that has Americans breathing a sigh of relief to come out against it? Makes no sense to me…
August 1st, 2011 at 9:46 am
Max,
So why do you suppose Mitt waited until “the eleventh hour and 59th minute” to help torpedo the only thing at this point that would avert the crisis?
And this isn’t about Ames or stopping Mitt or anything else. Some of us don’t just take positions to shill for a candidate. Some of us actually care about what happens in the government, as well as elections.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:48 am
12. Yeah, he finally stepped out from behind Palin and Bachmann’s skirt.
Or did he inhale a dust bunny while hiding under the bed?
August 1st, 2011 at 9:50 am
Palin took a stand WHEN IT MADE A DIFFERENCE in the negotiation process (securing a better deal).
Romney’s stand is self-serving after-the-fact.
This is sooooooooooooo typical of Romney!
August 1st, 2011 at 9:51 am
Matt C,
#14 My sentiments exactly. What a curious time to start weighing in (other than his support of Cut, Cap, and Tax which basically every Republican supports).
August 1st, 2011 at 9:52 am
Deg,
“I start working again tomorrow”
Congratulations! That’s great news!
And there’s a lot of truth in what you said about Canada.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:52 am
#14;
Whatever I may think about Mitt Romney from a political point of view, he is NOT stupid.
He has been in politics long enough to know when he is on a slippery slope and that he is plummeting in support. Rasmussen isn’t the only pollster recently to show that.
It’s called ‘stopping the bleeding.”
That’s what Romney’s position is all about. He probably has internal polls showing that if he came out for “the deal” he would even lose further support which he cannot afford to lose if he wants to preserve his front runner status.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:53 am
How is this statement different from the ones he had said in the past?He already had a position, but you guys make it sound like he didn’t have one.
He had already stated that he was for cuts, capping and balancing the budget and then the debt would take care of itself. *Sigh*
August 1st, 2011 at 9:55 am
#19 Thank you Matt. I appreciate your remarks.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:55 am
15
Mitt has no way to influence the negotiations (think McCain during the campaign suspension debacle), and rather than get bogged down in the House GOP’s mess he chose to stay out of D.C.’s demolition derby the past few weeks. He also smartly avoided backing a particular plan before knowing what the final plan would look like. He then assessed the final plan and gave his opinion of it. It is refreshing that Romney, unlike so many others, wasn’t willing to play the weekly cable news/talk radio charade on this deal. He ends up being the only true adult in the room.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:58 am
Can’t say I’m understanding the rationale for the timing or the stance under the current set of circumstances.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:58 am
bob,
Bleeding support? Romney has lead consistently for months. He leads despite largely spending little money and making few campaign stops. He is building up a machine that will be hard to stop, and his only credible challenger remains on the sidelines in Texas.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:59 am
Mitt’s telling America what he would push for in a situation like this if he were president. It’s consistent with his past advocacy of Cut, Cap, and Balance…..and with his position in favor of strengthening our Defense. Also, you can’t diss him for criticizing a plan earlier when we didn’t have the actual details until it was announced.
Having said all of that, I’m inclined to agree with Matt Coulter, and have commented to that effect in the past. Mitt could have handled this better.
On the other hand, the only guy who handled it well was Huntsman.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:02 am
20. Hmm…let’s see if I can guess what your response would have been had he come out in favor of the deal.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:02 am
Yep, I was right. Standing on the sidelines was no worse, politically, then taking a position.
That said, the claim that Romney was the last one out of the gate to take a position is very inaccurate. Romney was the FIRST one to support “Cut, Cap and Balance” in the bill, long before Palin, Bachmann or anyone else took a position. Bachmann wouldn’t even sign the pledge.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:02 am
Max,
“He ends up being the only true adult in the room.”
Really? By petulently opposing the only viable alternative to default in which Democrats conceded the Republicans’ largest premise- all cuts, no taxes- which came despite the fact that Republicans only control one of the three players in this drama?
August 1st, 2011 at 10:04 am
Dave,
“On the other hand, the only guy who handled it well was Huntsman”
I agree on that.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:07 am
#25:
The numbers don’t lie:
Last 4 polls after the ABC/WAPO poll showing Mitt Romney at 26% support. Brackets are last poll taken before current one:
August 1 Rasmussen 22% (33)
July 27 Gallup 17% (24)
July 21 Fox News 17% (18)
July 22 CNN 16% (24)
Yea, I would call that bleeding support. Again the numbers don’t lie.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:14 am
I’m waiting for Perry’s statement that has governor of Texas, he has nullified the compromise.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:15 am
It appears Romney has adopted Obama’s strategy of “leading from behind”
Very un-risky politically. It is a tactical blunder that will bring him down in a contested primary however.
It’s time for bold colors, no more pasty pastels.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:15 am
Matt “MWS” Says:
August 1st, 2011 at 9:31 am
So Romney is on record supporting default.
Check.
===============================================================
What are talking about, this deal just means that we will eventually go bankrupt.
A vote for this deal is an attack on are men and women in uniform. Sorry, I agree with Mitt. Those who disagree with Romney don’t realize how the Republicans abandoned conservative principles.
If you support this Deal, you are a major RINO or don’t understand what this does.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:16 am
teledude Says:
August 1st, 2011 at 10:15 am
It appears Romney has adopted Obama’s strategy of “leading from behind”
Very un-risky politically. It is a tactical blunder that will bring him down in a contested primary however.
It’s time for bold colors, no more pasty pastels.
==========================================================
Try understanding what has gone on. This is an act of Treason against our military….. Sorry, I am totally and completely against this act of treason.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:16 am
Frankly, I was prety shocked that Romney came out against it. I would have thought he would picked Boehner and McConnel over Bachmann and Paul. Given his extensive experience with a Democratic Legislature, I don’t understand his sudden allergies to compromise and political reality.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:18 am
Matt “MWS” Says:
August 1st, 2011 at 10:16 am
Frankly, I was prety shocked that Romney came out against it. I would have thought he would picked Boehner and McConnel over Bachmann and Paul. Given his extensive experience with a Democratic Legislature, I don’t understand his sudden allergies to compromise and political reality.
===============================================================
Because you don’t understand what has happened. When the second cut comes, if there is no disagreement, the Military budget has to be cut to balance the budge… That is an act of treason in my mind.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:18 am
Thunder,
Cutting spending is not “treason.”
August 1st, 2011 at 10:19 am
Matt “MWS” Says:
August 1st, 2011 at 10:18 am
Thunder,
Cutting spending is not “treason.”
====================================================
Cutting the Military is… and that is what this plan really does. Nothing else is on the chopping block in phase II. I call it treason…. what do you call it.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:19 am
Thunder,
This deal doesn’t balance the budget, nor are the cuts (to domestic OR defense) particularly deep. I doubt it would bring defense spending anywhere close to 2001 levels.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:20 am
29:
What about this is petulant? He held off until after the civil war was over and then attacked Obama and smoothed over the relations with his allies in Congress. It was about as tactful as it could have been.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:20 am
Thunder,
“Nothing else is on the chopping block in phase II.”
Not true. The compromise says the cuts will be split between defense and domestic.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:21 am
31. “Yea, I would call that bleeding support. Again the numbers don’t lie.
You neglected to point out that Perry was not included in the prior Rasmussen, but is now included. He took a cut of the pie from pretty much everyone, not just Romney, as would be expected.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:21 am
Well, I guess what I’m concerned with is, “What did Mitt know, and when did he know it about the bill?”
August 1st, 2011 at 10:21 am
Thomas,
“What about this is petulant?”
He’s demanding the impossible. He’s saying that default is better than not getting a little more of what you want.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:23 am
Matt “MWS” Says:
August 1st, 2011 at 10:19 am
Thunder,
This deal doesn’t balance the budget, nor are the cuts (to domestic OR defense) particularly deep. I doubt it would bring defense spending anywhere close to 2001 levels.
===============================================================================
Do have any clue how this deal works, let me explain.
On paper we get the first cut, but it is not guarnteed.
Then when the second cut comes, a committee decides what the cuts are. Then it goes to congress for a vote. If it doesn’t pass then Medicare and the Military is automattically cut. For all those on Medicare, they are then transferred to Medicaid. So, in the end, we are talking about a huge Military Cut.
I agree with Romney, and if your conservative, you will agree with Romney.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:24 am
Matt “MWS” Says:
August 1st, 2011 at 10:20 am
Thunder,
“Nothing else is on the chopping block in phase II.”
Not true. The compromise says the cuts will be split between defense and domestic.
====================================================
Not true, see 46… Medicaid and Social Security are exempted….
August 1st, 2011 at 10:24 am
How could anyone expect anything else than a statement only after the deal has been struck AND after Romney has seen which ways the winds are currently blowing. This man has no spine, no core, only ambition for purposes yet unknown.
I hope someone asks whether he prefers default, because at this late hour the only choices are deal or default.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:25 am
44. Jerald,
I was wondering the same, i.e. about all the candidates. Sure they make public announcements. But, behind the scenes, what conversations do they have, what additional insight do they get, what other factors are they privy to that we don’t see that feed into a position?
August 1st, 2011 at 10:26 am
It is very instructive to notice only one of the Presidential candidates had ANY impact on this debt ceiling debate.
Only one candidate provided leadership and once again was able to affect positive change in public policy by the strength of her convictions.
Everyone was ready to capitulate to the Boehner crap sandwich last week. She deserves credit for standing strong on principle and getting a better deal.
This is what real leadership does.
Morons and imbeciles mock her use of social media; it has proven to be very effective. More effective than anything the other dwarfs in the contest are doing.
She’s a real leader with real courage.
Thank you Mitten$ Rockefeller Romney for providing such a clear contrast that anyone can see it.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:26 am
48. Funny–I thought the wind was blowing in the other direction.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:27 am
Amen Romney. We are getting sold up the river. You are our last best hope.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:28 am
PabloZed Says:
August 1st, 2011 at 10:24 am
How could anyone expect anything else than a statement only after the deal has been struck AND after Romney has seen which ways the winds are currently blowing. This man has no spine, no core, only ambition for purposes yet unknown.
I hope someone asks whether he prefers default, because at this late hour the only choices are deal or default.
==============================================================================
I prefer Default (for one reason, its not really a Default). But Default is better than this deal…
August 1st, 2011 at 10:29 am
Thunder,
There is a lot of domestic spending besides Medicaid and Social Security. The second round of cuts would split between domestic and defense. I read through Boehner’s PowerPoint for House Republicans this morning. I’ll look for the link.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:30 am
Matt “MWS” Says:
August 1st, 2011 at 10:29 am
Thunder,
There is a lot of domestic spending besides Medicaid and Social Security. The second round of cuts would split between domestic and defense. I read through Boehner’s PowerPoint for House Republicans this morning. I’ll look for the link.
==========================================================================
Name them….. Those are the big ones….
August 1st, 2011 at 10:30 am
And why does the military have to have 1/2 the cuts…
August 1st, 2011 at 10:31 am
Oh, and I forgot, ObamaCare is also exempt…
August 1st, 2011 at 10:31 am
off to lunch… I predict this deal dies a quick death….. as details start to come out.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:32 am
Thunder,
“Name them….. ”
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/budget_gs.php
August 1st, 2011 at 10:33 am
14. Matt C., I’ve been critical of you in the past but major kudos to you for being consistent on this, a real stand up guy. The only ‘adult in the room,’ the only guy who has shown real guts in this debate by standing up to the talk radio bozos is Huntsman.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:35 am
Matt “MWS” Says:
August 1st, 2011 at 10:32 am
Thunder,
“Name them….. ”
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/budget_gs.php
=======================================================
Yes, and just about everything is exempt except the military and small budget items.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:35 am
Romney was playing a wait and see game. Now he comes out after the deal has been struck.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:36 am
RUBIOZONE Says:
August 1st, 2011 at 10:35 am
Romney was playing a wait and see game. Now he comes out after the deal has been struck.
================================================================
But not voted on… He gave them room to see what they would do, and they did a horrible job…. I predict Rubio will vote against this (or I will vote against him when he comes up for re-election)..
August 1st, 2011 at 10:37 am
Kudos to you Matt C. And go get ‘em MWS. Mitt was very wrong on this one.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:39 am
45:
I don’t see how he’s demanding default or demanding anything really. He’s just saying it’s a poor bill brought on by poor leadership.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:41 am
#50 – I love it. Palin posts something Facebook, and you claim that’s how she “led” during the debate. Can you please point to one arm she twisted, one congressman she convinced? Can you empirically show how she shaped the debate in any tangible way? Can you point to anything she wrote which pointed the way how the bill should be modified.
Of course you can’t, because none of that exists.
She came out against the Boehner bill AFTER the tea party caucus revolted against it. Jim DeMint had far more to do with it than SP.
Palin supporters seem to believe that others jump to her words in the same way they do. It’s convenient, because it creates a self-sustaining circle of positive reinforcement for their own beliefs in her “power.”
August 1st, 2011 at 10:42 am
There have been so many ” deals”, which ones are who for ???? At least Romney doesn’t have a line that says
” I was against Monday’s deal, but I liked Tuesday’s deal. But , then , I didn’t like Wednesdays deal, so I voted against it and I got Thursdays’ deal…which I still don’t like, but I’m O.K with Saturday’s deal unless it’s changed to Monday’s deal.
Following the blogs on this site is just as whacky
CraigS
August 1st, 2011 at 10:43 am
Thunder,
“Yes, and just about everything is exempt except the military and small budget items.”
Those “small budget items” amount to about $1.5 trillion.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:46 am
David,
#66 That was a much more eloquent way of expressing what I considered writing as a two sentence snark, but decided wasn’t worth the time…..
August 1st, 2011 at 10:52 am
67:
Pretty much. Romney’s in a position now that the legislative process is over that he doesn’t have to take sides on the making of the sausage. He can be against the finished product, but not against the people on our side who put it together, or against the people on our side who tightened the screws and got us the best deal possible. At the same time he’s against Obama for negotiating from the wrong end of the field.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:58 am
Thomas,
“Pretty much. Romney’s in a position now that the legislative process is over ”
But it’s not over. They still have to vote on this deal. Romney decided to side with the Radio Clowns over prudence and stability (which were once hallmarks of a conservative temperament).
The most conservative candidate in this whole debt ceiling debate has been Jon Huntsman.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:02 am
66. Your facts are wrong.
They had the votes for the first Boehner bill and had announced it was a done deal until the facebook post appeared, then they suddenly did not have the votes.
This has been reported in various media outlets, (including the New York Times) it is not just speculation by Palin supporters.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/28/palins-well-timed-reminder-to-freshmen/
August 1st, 2011 at 11:02 am
RomNots are so predictable.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:02 am
Its not the job of un-elected, non-office holding candidates to insert their noses into the legislative debate process.
Now that a deal is done, and is almost guarenteed to pass, they are fully within their right to comment on it.
The fact that one finds this a bad deal hardly means they want to see the government default. In fact, I agree that the Republicans should only deliver the necessary number of votes to see that this bill passes, because by potentially allowing a tax increase to occur before the budget is balanced, and by putting the military under the gun of spending cuts, it does have several flaws.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:02 am
No military cuts, no tax increases, but the budget will be “capped and balanced”.
Show me.
I’m not a fan of this statement. I can understand the need for contrast. I can imagine a Republican super majority with Romney in the WH crafting a very different bill.
But . . . . if I support a guy because he’s the most likely to use business and math skills, and he joins Michele Bachmann in the Tea Party’s intellectual sewer, I notice the smell. And I don’t like it.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:04 am
The main problem is that, with the debt comission and the automatic triggers, there is a strong possibility that Democrats will be able to obtain either tax increases on those who already pay too much, or significant decreases in security spending.
Thats a bad deal for the country
August 1st, 2011 at 11:04 am
Telly,
From your link:
“There is no proof that Ms. Palin’s online missive was even read by any of the wavering Republicans or played any role in helping to stir up the sheep in Mr. Boehner’s flock.”
There is also no proof that Boehner had the votes then. They can schedule the vote HOPING to get the votes in time, and then delay if it doesn’t materialize. I think that’s what happened.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:05 am
The contrast in leadership styles between Palin and Romney could not be more clear.
We need a leader.
Conservatives have been without strong leadership for decades now.
We’re going to have an opportunity to get one this time.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:05 am
Defense spending makes up about 20% of the budget, yet under this deal would get 50% of the cuts. This is not a good deal, from Mitt’s perspective. He is right to blame this on Obama. If he were President we would get nothing anywhere close to this.
RomNots are always going to be RomNots. It is impossible for Mitt to do anything right in their eyes. He endorsed CCB before anyone else. He supported Boehner as he tried to fight Obama and hold his caucus together. Whiners are always going to whine, and RomNots are always going to be disingenuous. There’s not much more that needs to be said about them.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:05 am
bob,
Actually the numbers do lie. The bracketed numbers represent a poll of a different list of candidates. All this shows is that Romney’s strength varies depending on his opponents. If you were subtract candidates from the list, Romney’s numbers would likely change again. And when you go to the early state polling, Romney’s strength continues to be consistently far ahead of the pack.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:06 am
65 – And a poor political situation where we have idiot Democrats in charge of the country.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:07 am
#72 – Yes, let’s read what’s at that link:
“There is no proof that Ms. Palin’s online missive was even read by any of the wavering Republicans or played any role in helping to stir up the sheep in Mr. Boehner’s flock.
But the former Alaska governor is very good at capturing media attention when she wants it. And refusing to go along with what the establishment — especially the Republican establishment — wants is one of the ways she does it.”
I couldn’t have said it any better myself, really.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:08 am
78,
teledude is right. The contrast is quite clear when one ‘leader’ quits her job while the other stays on the job against a brutal left-wing legislature and the power of the Kenndey-loving media hounding him day and night.
Romney took on one of our nation’s liberal strongholds, while Palin couldn’t stand the heat in one of the reddest states in the union. Now that is contrast.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:09 am
The idea that there is no tax increases in this is also a farce. There is a real possibility that tax increases will result from this deal.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:11 am
“The idea that there is no tax increases in this is also a farce. There is a real possibility that tax increases will result from this deal.”
Not exactly. Republicans can still hold the line on no tax hikes.
The real problem is that this could enable the Democrats to force Republicans to choose between a strong military, and low taxes.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:11 am
78. At last! Something we can agree on! We will have a true conservative leader. And his name is ROMNEY!
August 1st, 2011 at 11:12 am
Watch,
That display of intellectual honesty is one reason I’ve long had a lot of respect for you. We needn’t love everything a candidate does to support him.
I’m still waiting for a definitive statement from Pawlenty. So far- when reporters asked for comment- his spokesman said the deal is “nothing to celebrate”- but that doesn’t really answer the question.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:13 am
The Tea Party argument about the debt ceiling, the economy, and government spending, as I understand it, boils down to something like this:
“We are headed for the cliff. If we drive the bus over the cliff now, we can get a new bus.”
And the problem I see with this argument, the thing they don’t seem to be taking into account is that we are all in the bus!
August 1st, 2011 at 11:13 am
85 – They could, but they probably won’t. This deal allows them to posture for their Tea Party backers and declare victory and then cave to Democrats down the road to avoid defense cuts. Also, built into the plan is the assumption that the Bush Tax Cuts are going to go away in 2012, so they have already accepted tax increases.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:13 am
And they can cave down the road when no one is watching.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:14 am
MK,
“The real problem is that this could enable the Democrats to force Republicans to choose between a strong military, and low taxes.”
When you don’t have enough money to pay for everything you want, you either need to get more money, or cut out some of what you want.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:15 am
Watch,
“We are headed for the cliff. If we drive the bus over the cliff now, we can get a new bus.”
That is one of the best metaphores I have read in a long time.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:15 am
83. Why do you feel the need to misstate facts Max?
Does she frighten you that much?
You are going to wish “she’s a quitter” was true very soon my friend.
heh heh
August 1st, 2011 at 11:19 am
Jax,
Speaking of staying true to form, here is what your wrote in the “Romney Making Himself Vulnerable?” thread:
http://race42012.com/2011/07/31/romney-making-himself-vulnerable/#comment-885806
It would seem you’ve shifted positions to stay in line with Mitt.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:19 am
“When you don’t have enough money to pay for everything you want, you either need to get more money, or cut out some of what you want.”
Our national defense should be the last thing to end up on the chopping block – particularly when we’re doing NOTHING to stop the flow of billions of dollars to China, which is then used to build up an even stronger military hostile to our interests.
I’m willing, in exchange for an agreement that would ELIMINATE the deficit and PAY BACK the debt, to see some tax hikes (though no more than, say, 17% of the deficit should be met through higher taxes on the top 1% – they already pay too much)…as well as some reductions to the military (say a one-time 10% cut with guarenteed increases linked to inflation including food and fuel).
But Democrats, I expect, will push for far more than that. Obama wanted to put 25% or more of the burden of closing the deficit on the top 1%, and the military could see drastic cuts to the point we have to start cutting personell and hardware.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:22 am
She, who would be (little g) god, will announce. Then will quite for ‘personal reasons’ when her money train crashes into the station.
Telle, please, don’t do anything to hurt yourself when you jump in front of the crashing train.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:22 am
91 – That isn’t the point. This situation forces Republicans to choose between two options that are neither necessary to cut the deficit or politically desirable. There is no reason that 50% of the cuts should come from defense spending. Some defense spending cuts are appropriate (I realize Romney differs from me on this), but they shouldn’t take more than their share of the hit. This situation forces Republicans to put a heavier burden on defense than it deserves or to capitulate to Democratic demands that taxes go up. And they can capitulate behind closed doors without the spotlight on them, so it becomes just an asterisks to the victory they can claim from this plan.
It is political gamesmanship, pure and simple. It is exactly the kind of crap that makes people hate Washington politicians. The purpose of the plan is to allow everyone to save face, not to make any real cuts. A clean debt ceiling increase would be better than this.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:23 am
#17. Soooooo wise of Romney. Politics is a game, my friend, and he plays it well. And THAT is exactly what we need this cycle, someone that’s not an idiot that can maneuver and adjust and play a good strategy. Look, Republicans didn’t make this a game, Obama did. Therefore, Mitt shall bear him at this game. The only way you can win a game is to play better than the other guy. It’s unfortunate that is has to be that way, but it is. We can stop crying about it and nominate the guy who doesn’t play like an idiot!
August 1st, 2011 at 11:24 am
MWS For some reason when I need a good metaphor, I think of a bus.
And the respect thing is reciprocated. Keep fightin’ the good fight.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:25 am
94 – What have I said that contradicts that? I think Mitt probably would have been wiser to stay out of it. I do think his analysis of the current deal is the correct one though. You will twist anything to make Romney look bad. I admit I am a Romney fanboy, and look for the positive. There is a lot of positive in what he said. I don’t think he should have given into the false pressure from the media and haters like you, but having done so I think his position is the right one.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:32 am
Not true. The compromise says the cuts will be split between defense and domestic.
=========================================
Defense takes 50% of the hit while domestic programs share 50% of the hit. That is a dangerous deal and needs to be sunk. What is offensive is that Boehner is taking bows for it and saying they got 98% of what he wanted. That is a out and out lie. Boehner needs to go.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:34 am
teledude, please return to planet earth. She quit as governor. She couldn’t last one term as governor of one of the most conservative states in the country. Her approval ratings in that state today are dreadful. Alaska isn’t exactly Vermont. If she couldn’t handle a few lawsuits from liberal crackpots how on earth can she handle the massive responsibilities of the Presidency?
Cults of personality are a destructive force. You would be wise to abandon your Palin-worship, just as she abandoned the people who voted for her.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:39 am
98. Your analogy is way off.
Mitt waited until the game was over, than said he didn’t like the way it ended.
There is no way you can say that is leadership.
It may be good politics to not get into the mud wrestling in the short term, it is going to redound very poorly for him in the future. It reinforces his finger in the wind, shape shifting, unprincipled, politically weak persona. *gak*
August 1st, 2011 at 11:41 am
Thank goodness Romney has made it definitively clear that he supports cut, cap, and balance, and not this current proposal. Now the anti-Romney crowd can know what stance to have.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:42 am
“say that is leadership.”
…and neither Romney, nor Palin, were either elected or appointed to any such position of leadership.
Imagine trying to negotiate with your boss for a raise while the rest of the office stands around you in a circle shouting what they think you should do. It doesn’t help.
Romney has offered plenty of evidence that he is a strong and competent leader in the area of finance.
Considering Palin cut and ran from the job she was elected to in order to chase a television/tour/icon status, none of her supporters are in any position to lecture anyone else on even the SPELLING of the word leadership.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:43 am
Jax, When Mitt isn’t all things to all people all the time, it isn’t a failing of the people. When Mitt tries to BE all things to all people all the time, that is most definitely Mitt’s failing.
This isn’t about MWS twisting anything. It’s about Mitt choosing popularity over substance, and NOBODY who is paying close attention is going to admire this moment in Mitt’s campaign.
My advice: Go a little easier on the opposition. Silk never polished a gemstone.
It may sound weird, but in a lot of ways, they really are “just here to help”.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:45 am
The fact is that Romney is not much above his institutional support from 2008. He got around 26% in Iowa and he seems to be just under that. He is around the 32% he got in NH. He seems to have picked up a little of McCain’s support in SC. His best poll in Florida lately is the 27% in a PPP poll which is under the 32% he got in Florida.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:51 am
Frankie boy, what’s your goddess polling at today?
Jus say the american peeps are much smarter than you give us credit for! We said no to palin in 08, and we’ll say no again in 12.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:54 am
Monday, August 1, 2011
Perry won’t get specific on deal
A spokesman for Gov. Rick Perry would not directly say today whether Perry thinks members of Congress should vote for the debt-ceiling deal reached between Republicans and President Barack Obama.
Asked whether members of Congress should vote for the deal, Perry spokesman Mark Miner said, “The governor thinks the right track to go down is ‘cut, cap and balance.’ That was the approach he believed was best for the country.”
So far, Michele Bachmann — who, since the beginning, opposed Boehner’s plan and the current deal — and Jon Huntsman, who’s supported both, are coming out looking like the strongest leaders.
They’ve come to opposite conclusions, but at least they came to conclusions.
Posted by Christian Heinze at 12:05 PM 0 comments
Labels: Rick Perry news
Pawlenty: “This deal is nothing to celebrate”
Tim Pawlenty’s spokesman, Alex Conant, addresses the debt deal.
“This deal is nothing to celebrate. Only in Washington would the political class think it’s a victory when the government narrowly avoids default, agrees to go further into debt, and does little to reform a spending system that cannot be sustained by our children and grandchildren. While no further evidence was needed, this entire debt ceiling fiasco demonstrates that President Obama must be replaced.”
Romney opposes debt deal
This puts him to the right of the debate, but it’s late, and it’s short.
It obviously won’t please those who supported the deal, and by virtue of its timing, probably won’t please those who opposed the deal.
In short, in trying to please everyone, Romney has probably pleased no one.
-GOP12
August 1st, 2011 at 11:55 am
92 –
Matt, when talking to my work mate the other day about the debt “crisis” and how he said there should be no connection between spending and raising the debt ceiling and “it has been done for years by both parties” I used a boat as an analogy instead of a bus. Being in a bus going over a cliff is kind of morbid as you think nobody is going to survive that crash – but being in a boat with multiple holes that just keep filling it up with water and we keep getting further from shore.
We can get out of the boat now and let the current boat sink and swim back to shore and then rebuild a better stronger boat – or we can keep bailing water and get further out to sea to the point where nobody would make it back to shore once the boat takes on too much water.
The current boat is not able to be patched and bandaged together. There are just too many holes (entitlements and pork) to think it can be reversed. We all (Americans) must take responsibility for what has become of our government and start fresh with a new focus (boat in this case).
August 1st, 2011 at 11:56 am
The spin is unbelievable. I am now convinced Romney is not smart enough to be POTUS. He doesn’t even understand basic politics and how the timing of his position might affect the perception of him. He thinks he was being smart waiting but this could end up being his Giuliani 911 moment.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:57 am
Jax,
#100
Fair enough.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:59 am
102. This is no personality cult.
Her resignation was a selfless act of courage for the good of the state of Alaska.
Add to that she had already accomplished all she said she was going to do for the state, a remarkable feat for anyone, let along a young ‘outsider’ who had to forge political alliances with many disparate groups.
No one has a record to match what she did for her state, and the cries of “quitter’ are the weak wailing’s of political opponents who are about to see what real resolve and leadership looks like. She is the opposite of a ‘quitter.’
The lawsuits may have been brought by crackpots; they were costing the state millions and preventing any real work from getting done. She was a target and saw the best way to help the state would be to remove the target. There were zero lawsuits after she resigned, as they were just a weapon for her political destruction
We are so accustomed to politicians holding on to office and fighting for their own personal political fortunes (Weiner? Rangle?) that a truly selfless ‘public servant’ seems odd, but that is exactly what she is. We are used to politicians fighting to stay in office and milk the system for as long as they can.
People resign from office for many reasons, some quite noble. The quitter meme is a mindless slogan that has no weight with people who know the truth.
And
The truth will out.
I’m just here to help.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:03 pm
tele –
did you just compare Palin’s actions to that of Weiner & Rangle – but she was “brave” enough to step down?
That was a little fuzzy logic in your defense of the mama bear, arctic fox, baracuda, gladiatrix w/ a night stick.
Is the last name you and TEX have given her why she had law suits coming out her ear? Was she in some kind of sex scandal involving night sticks and TEX and he just doesn’t want that information coming forward so he encouraged her to leave office?
See how stupid it can get when you start spinning things about candidates?
August 1st, 2011 at 12:03 pm
75.Watchinitall Says:
August 1st, 2011 at 11:02 am
“But . . . . if I support a guy because he’s the most likely to use business and math skills, and he joins Michele Bachmann in the Tea Party’s intellectual sewer, I notice the smell. And I don’t like it.”
===
Hey, Watchini..
Dem are fightin’ words. First you attacked my numer one… Leave my number two and number four ALONE!
August 1st, 2011 at 12:05 pm
Ah nevermind, Michele and Mitt can take it.
Carry on…
August 1st, 2011 at 12:05 pm
Ben,
#110. Then I think I need to complete your analogy, to make it more applicable to the American economic and society.
In your (now very large) boat, there are 100 people, but the lifeboats can only hold 10.
If we let this “boat” sink, most people are going to come out very, very badly.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:09 pm
114. Your post is only a reflection of the twisted shit that goes through your mind.
Too much information!
Please keep your sick fantasies to yourself.
You are not making a positive contribution to this site and are only diminishing your own credibility posting things like that.
Again,
I’m just here to help.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:12 pm
Considering Palin cut and ran from the job she was elected to in order to chase a television/tour/icon status, none of her supporters are in any position to lecture anyone else on even the SPELLING of the word leadership.
===================================================
There were two reasons for her resignation. First were the legal bills surrounding the frivolous ethics complaints. The second was that Democrats who had helped pass a lot of her agenda were now joining with Republicans and threatening to roll back much of what she had passed and threatening her agenda. Her resignation spiked the legislative Democrats plans. Sometimes leadership is a strategic withdrawl.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:12 pm
Tele -
Hey – I’m not the one that fantasizes about Palin w/ a night stick – its TEX.
There have been a number of us that have been trying to piece together the twisted dimentia that goes on in his head (and to a certain extent yours as well) re: Palin coma that you and he seem to be in.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:13 pm
The main problem comes next year when Democrats are likely to find a way to stick some kind of revenue increase into the debt comission’s proposal for the additional spending cuts, knowing full well that the alternative would be equally unsavory to the GOP – a significant reduction in our foreign power.
Question numero uno for the GOP now has to be how to spare the military from devastating drawdowns without allowing Obama to bleed the tax base dry.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:13 pm
Some of the people here have absolutely no understanding of politics.
First, Romney is not the President of the United States (yet) or an elected official to make a decision on the defecit and debt ceiling. You cant be a leader on negotiations that you have ZERO authority from the American people. The only candidates that should be taking a stand on the issue are Bachmann and Paul.
Bachmann is just wrong on it. She voted against cut, cap and balance because Obamacare wasn’t repealed. Is she that dumb to believe that the Democratic Senate and/or Obama would sign such a bill? Paul, although I think he is wrong, at least stands by his principles.
Second, How is Romney suppose to take a position on an issue that most members of CONGRESS did not know the details about? Quite idiotic to expect such a thing. Palin isn’t running for President, but she is trying to maintain her control over Tea Party folk for 2016. A veiled threat of contested primaries for members who voted for Boehner’s plan is childish and far from Presidential. She shouldn’t be commenting on the negotiations that she has no idea what the details are, if she chooses to do so, she shouldn’t be hurting our own caucus.
The Tea Party is a portion of the House GOP, which is 1/5 of the US Government (I am splitting up each house in two due to parties). It is idiotic to believe that the Tea Party can FORCE all of their ideals (which I generally agree with) all at once. Some of the members (Bachmann, Palin, Lee) have tarnished the brand and may make it difficult for the Tea Party Caucus to grow in future elections (which will be a shame).
Third, Romney supported the Boehner plan that passed the House, this bill is not the Boehner plan. This deal does not have direct cuts in 2012, no guaranteee for BBA to pass Congress, and leaves the door open for tax increases and cuts to defense. As Romney said, the House GOP is put into a tough spot due to 1/3 control of Government (House, Senate, WH) and Obama/media have put them in a tough spot with deadline.
Finally, I would assume that if Romney was a member of Congress he would vote for the bill to deter the default. However, he is not and so he can take a position based on his ideals which is that this deal is not good and as a candidate for POTUS, he could not support it. Again, Romney acknowledges the real problem (lack of Obama leadership) and the difficult position for GOP.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:14 pm
119 -
So we can assume that if it comes down to it she would potentialy leave her post as POTUS as well if it was – in your words – for “strategic withdrawl”?
Don’t like the thought of a president going in with a possible exit strategy if the heat gets too rough.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:16 pm
102:
Alaska is many things, but one of the most conservative states in the country is NOT it. In fact, it may be the single least conservative red state.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:18 pm
Watch,
This strikes me as the sort of thing that Mitt 2008 would have said, when he was trying to “out conservative” everyone.
I thought (like many others here) that Mitt was going back to his pragmatic, technocrat roots this cycle.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:23 pm
Matt –
and I can appreciate you “addition” to my analogy – which I would remind you of how I forsee it. If those that can make it to shore now decide not to then they potentially doom the rest to definate failure by getting too far out to sea for anybody to make it at all.
It is a debate of whether or not we keep rowing the doomed ship out to sea or we salvage what we can now and start fresh with a new ship once the shore is reached. (which I admit would come with a period of suffering and difficulty)
August 1st, 2011 at 12:23 pm
teledude, please return to planet earth. She quit as governor. She couldn’t last one term as governor of one of the most conservative states in the country. Her approval ratings in that state today are dreadful. Alaska isn’t exactly Vermont. If she couldn’t handle a few lawsuits from liberal crackpots how on earth can she handle the massive responsibilities of the Presidency?
====================================================
And these are the same polls that said McCain had a 2 point lead in 2008. McCain won Alaska by 21 points. At least $1 million in legal bills are not a few lawsuits. I suppose you chicken hawks could pull that kind of money
out of petty cash. Worth noting you can’t file ethics complaints against a President. I would suggest you need to quit deluding yourself.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:25 pm
To my fellow Palin supporters…stop talking about Palin’s resignation…please. You are wasting your time. Max had nothing to offer the discussion…nothing in defense of his beloved Romney so he did the next best thing…deflect. Don’t play his game. There is plenty of time for that later.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:27 pm
121.Matthew Kilburn Says:
August 1st, 2011 at 12:13 pm
“The main problem comes next year when Democrats are likely to find a way to stick some kind of revenue increase into the debt comission’s proposal for the additional spending cuts, knowing full well that the alternative would be equally unsavory to the GOP – a significant reduction in our foreign power.
Question numero uno for the GOP now has to be how to spare the military from devastating drawdowns without allowing Obama to bleed the tax base dry.”
===
Bingo! Hey, I agree with Kilburn. A first?
Look, Michele (from the beginnning has held steadfast), Mitt (better late than never), and Ron (as always) are on the correct side of this. We can’t afford the budget going up another $8 Tril the next 10 years.
T-Paw, Palin, and Perry (y tu, Rick?) are not showing leadership but rather projecting confusion. Take a stand and quit falling for TYPICAL budget games.
I applaud Congresswoman Michele Bachmann & Governor (and lifetime varmint hunter) Mitt Romney!
August 1st, 2011 at 12:27 pm
#1 “Romney supports default”
The logic fails here because he states how he would proceed as President, which would not have been at odds with a Congress that is trying to CCB…given his philosophy, there would have been no danger of default.
He recognizes the predicament of the Republican Congress and puts the blame squarely where it belongs – on Obama.
He is also stating as President, he would not agree to higher taxes…something very different than what Obama is pushing.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:27 pm
Ben,
It’s also a question of whether or not the ship is truly “doomed” or if it’s just in need of a major overhaul.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:28 pm
Six,
“The logic fails here because he states how he would proceed as President, which would not have been at odds with a Congress that is trying to CCB…given his philosophy, there would have been no danger of default.”
That’s fine and dandy, but he’s not President. Obama is, and even given the reality that the House Republicans are facing, Mitt still says no.
The only alternative to “yes” right now is default.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:31 pm
So we can assume that if it comes down to it she would potentialy leave her post as POTUS as well if it was – in your words – for “strategic withdrawl”?
========================================
The circumstances are very different. She had little support from Republicans in the state legislature. If she were to become President then she would have the support of the Republicans in Congress. There is no way Democrats could get 2/3 support to override vetoes unless they get 2/3 of the seats and that is unlikely.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:33 pm
122 ilfigo
Well said!!!
Rush just now spending nearly two hours on why this is bill is so dang bad, that it will do specifically the two things Romney mentioned: Cut the military to bad ways and open the door to higher taxes. The Heritage Foundation is against it too.
Mitt is right: The only hope for viable solutions depends on electing a very different POTUS.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:34 pm
Do you think our government/economy can make that transition with the current political atmosphere? When all we hear from both sides is “well the other guys did it last time” as justification for continually poking more holes in the hull it doesn’t bode well in my mind as to the ability to repair the current ship while it is at sea.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:36 pm
Look, Michele (from the beginnning has held steadfast), Mitt (better late than never), and Ron (as always) are on the correct side of this. We can’t afford the budget going up another $8 Tril the next 10 years.
T-Paw, Palin, and Perry (y tu, Rick?) are not showing leadership but rather projecting confusion. Take a stand and quit falling for TYPICAL budget games.
======================================
Michelle also voted against cut, cap, and balance. That is not leadership.
I also find that your analysis seems to fit your biases. Your stand is made of jello.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:36 pm
133 –
So by your logic – Romney should have quit his governorship 2 years in because he had an even more overwhelmingly democratic state legislature to override vetoes and couldn’t get anything done. huh…..
He didn’t give up his post under those circumstances – he stuck with it and turned a $2B deficit into a $500M surplus in 2 years through cutting $1B+ in his first year as governor (yes – with a largely democratic legislature fighting him along the way).
Your point doesn’t hold much water.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:37 pm
So…do the Romney supporters officially agree with Palin’s stance on this issue?
August 1st, 2011 at 12:38 pm
Are you people crazy? Holding Mitt to account re: what he would do if he were what? Speaker under Obama? That will ever be the case. Duh!
At the very least he would be POTUS with (we hope) a GOP House. Maybe a GOP Senate. Completely different scenario.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:39 pm
jersey,
What is Palin’s stance on this final compromise?
August 1st, 2011 at 12:40 pm
K.G.
No, we’re holding Mitt accountable for his position, which (effectively) is that default is better than this compromise.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:44 pm
FIRST OF ALL – anyone who says that a Presidential Candidate doesn’t have the right to interject their opinion into this debate is wrong. That candidate could be in charge of this economy in 18 months and they have every right, and a responsibility, to interject their opinion and possibly sway elected representative’s opinions in the process.
I, personally, commend Romney for taking a stance…but he should have taken that stance a week or two ago when Reid refused to bring CCB to the Senate floor. He should have taken his stance when President Obama decided to use his bully pulpit to infuse fear mongering into the debate. He should have taken his stance while the negotiations were still being worked out.
If he’s the best chance we have…then God help us!!!
August 1st, 2011 at 12:45 pm
Jersey…
I think Palin was wrong to oppose the Boehner plan, which Romney supported. I am not sure I have heard Palin’s FB post about the new proposed deal.
I also think it was childish and far from Presidential to put forth a veiled threat to members of your own caucus. The POTUS is the President of the party as well and Palin was wrong for that comment.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:45 pm
Jr. Your queen. Like her movie. epic Fail.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:46 pm
Bachmann/Huckabee ’12
Romney/Huckabee ’12
Perry/Rudy ’12
..all beat Obama/Biden and change our financial course. This Obama/Reid/Boehner deal DOES NOT save us from ruin. Kick out Boehner, put in Bachmann. Michele has promised to KEEP our credit rating and NOT default. There are bills pending where we pay our military in full BUT only interest on the major debt to get us to NOVEMBER 2012 when we win back the White House and the other two houses as well overwhelmingly! And Republicans are not screwing up this time. It’s our last chance.
Welcome aboard, Mitt
August 1st, 2011 at 12:50 pm
114,120 Ben the sick pervert
“Is the last name you and TEX have given her why she had law suits coming out her ear? Was she in some kind of sex scandal involving night sticks and TEX and he just doesn’t want that”
==================================
You’re one very sick,demented,deranged,low life psychopath.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:50 pm
140 – Matt, let’s be honest here…this bill is not much better, or different, than any other bill that’s been floating around since CCB was shelved. This could have been so easily adverted. Boehner could have refused any further negotiations until CCB was voted on in the Senate. He could have forced Reid’s hand. If Reid continued to refuse…him and the Democrats would have looked like the obstructionists that they are. He decided to play their game and he lost. He is now saying that he got 98% of what he wanted all along…if that’s the case, then he has no business being the Speaker.
Palin’s stance has been consistent.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:50 pm
Craig,
“Kick out Boehner, put in Bachmann”
Ha! Mike Pence and the Tea Party Freshman wouldn’t even support Bachmann for a lower level leadership post (conference chair). They supported “the other guy” (can’t even remember his name).
August 1st, 2011 at 12:51 pm
Uh-oh – now I’m on the night stick warning by TEX.
I’d better watch out.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:51 pm
144 – What are you talking about?
August 1st, 2011 at 12:52 pm
Really disappointed in Perry. Perhaps he’s not running after all…
August 1st, 2011 at 12:55 pm
143 – I don’t think Romney supported Boehner’s proposal from last week…I think he just commended him for not wanting to raise taxes…but I could be wrong…BUT if I am wrong then Romney’s approval could have helped sway undecideds minds since he is a likely, posible, nominee.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:57 pm
106 – What is wrong with this moment in Mitt’s campaign? For all the whining, I have yet to see someone say where Mitt is wrong.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:58 pm
Why the double standard? Why is this same standard not being applied to TPaw? Or Perry?
August 1st, 2011 at 12:58 pm
148.
Matt, you know better than that. It’s all backroom politics and when Boehner steps down after this fiasco (assuming this Obama/Reid/Boehner bill with the help of Pelosi doesn’t get tons of Democrats aboard TODAY)…
We change DC.
August 1st, 2011 at 12:58 pm
Jersey…142. Sorry pal, but you are wrong. The American people have not voted for that person to “lead” or anything else for that matter. You can have your own opinions of course, but kinda of idiotic to comment on something when you dont have the details of what you are commenting on.
You should learn to read…Romney supported the Boehner bill and also CCB.
August 1st, 2011 at 1:00 pm
153 – it’s the Monday morning quarterbacking(literally) where Romney is wrong. As a possible nominee, he had a stake in the debate…he chose to wait and see. Some will spin it that he wanted to know all the details…the truth is this wreaks of political opportunism and expediency…charges often associated with Governor Romney.
August 1st, 2011 at 1:03 pm
So by your logic – Romney should have quit his governorship 2 years in because he had an even more overwhelmingly democratic state legislature to override vetoes and couldn’t get anything done. huh…..
===================================================
Actually Palin had a lot on the line. In 1 1/2 years she had passed major ethics reforms, got a natural gas pipeline deal negotiated and through the legislature, reformed the state’s royalty system, took on big oil, and started weaning Alaska off of earmarks as she cut the earmarks 75% during her term. She also ended up with a $12 billion surplus. She had a major effect on the state of Alaska in her 1 1/2 years and that would have been in jeapordy.
The difference is that Romney was not in the crosshairs of the White House. He had a deficit of $1.3 billion. How did he solve it? He raised hundreds of millions in state fees. His cuts largely affected state aid to local governments. That means he pushed the hard decisions to local governments.
August 1st, 2011 at 1:03 pm
Perry is making noise but he never said he will run.
People who are pushing him to run are flunkys who need well paid jobs
and his friends Crony Capitalists.
He will not run,he knows Sarah Palin is ready to get in the race.
August 1st, 2011 at 1:06 pm
156 – haha. Don’t have the details? Romney is more plugged into Washington than any other candidate. You mean to tell me that he doesn’t have people on the ground to update him with what’s going on? You are right though…he did weigh in on Boehner’s bill…after it passed…
August 1st, 2011 at 1:06 pm
also think it was childish and far from Presidential to put forth a veiled threat to members of your own caucus.
=====================================
The fact that primary voters will hold you accountable is a threat? That’s democracy.
August 1st, 2011 at 1:07 pm
132 – Nonsense. We have at least a couple weeks until default.
August 1st, 2011 at 1:08 pm
141 – Nonsense. Quit being a hater
August 1st, 2011 at 1:11 pm
156 – Romney didn’t support the Boehner bill. He supported Boehner’s no increased taxes line.
August 1st, 2011 at 1:11 pm
157 – Nonsense. The bill hasn’t even been brought to a vote yet.
August 1st, 2011 at 1:13 pm
“I also think it was childish and far from Presidential to put forth a veiled threat to members of your own caucus.” So you admit that the Speaker of the House was Childish.
August 1st, 2011 at 1:14 pm
164 – that’s what I thought but ilfigo convinced me I should learn to read…
August 1st, 2011 at 1:16 pm
OJ, hope the family is well!
August 1st, 2011 at 1:19 pm
160 Jersey
Plugged in–on all this fast-moving caca? Didn’t you hear Christy Noem say she heard it on the news before she got a conference call. Didn’t you hear all the reps and senators on TV saying they hadn’t read the bill, were commenting on rumors–and rumors of rumors?
It’s dumb to make comments on chaos.
August 1st, 2011 at 1:24 pm
You RomNots once again prove your lack of independent thought and consideration.
Read the statement:
“As president, my plan would have produced a budget that was cut, capped and balanced”
So he is saying that as president, the new plan wouldn’t have even been a consideration in the first place. With Romney as president, the budget would have been cut, capped, and balanced. So anything other than Cut, Cap, and Balance, is not good enough for President Romney.
I like that.
August 1st, 2011 at 1:38 pm
If congress does not pass this deal, Romney scores big time with the fiscal cons/Tea Party….just sayin…He’s ahead of most of you on this….Even if it does pass, if the Street downgrades US borrowing power regardless, Romney still looks like the guy that called it….its a safe statement at this point…THE Deal is Not done yet people….
August 1st, 2011 at 1:49 pm
Franklin –
you tend to me one of the more thoughtfull and thought provoking Palin supporters on here. I have never said that Palin didn’t accomplish anything. I’m sure she did some good things. I just don’t like trying to use a heavily democratic legislature as a justification to leaving your post 1/2 way through.
And then for you to turn around and use TEXs format for trying to downplay what Romney accomplished in Mass makes me less likely to pay much attention to your Pro-Palin mantra. I actually like Palin less because of TEX.
If Palin was the nominee (I don’t even think she is running but IF) – then I would supporter her fully. But besides not thinking she is running – I don’t think she can pull independants against Obama and thus think it would be nearly impossible – if not completely impossible for her to pull off a win in the generals.
And for TEX – why the double standard for you to use the term Mitt “butt-boys” referring to us Romney supporters on here but then you turn around and get up in arms for me playing with your night stick wet dream and connect you as a Palin sex slave? Doesn’t the knife cut both ways?
August 1st, 2011 at 2:10 pm
I think post number 172. is ban worthy.
This site does not need this type of sexually explicit crap.
It reveals a real misogynist streak in Ben that is beyond depraved.
There is noting wrong with the usual back and forth and kidding we do with each other, but today Ben has shown himself to be a little weird in a not cool way.
August 1st, 2011 at 2:15 pm
so “butt-boy” is not sexually explicit??
If I’m gone then TEX had better be.
August 1st, 2011 at 2:18 pm
But it doesn’t suprise me that a Palin drone would try to cut out their detractors. If there are enough of us (ala Alaska’s legislature) maybe they will just up and quit like their queen.
August 1st, 2011 at 2:20 pm
As a side note – Kavon – if you find my comments on this thread to be “too far” then I appologize and I will refrain from further comments of that type. In the same breath I ask that you tell TEX to refrain from his over the top commentary to keep the playing field level. Unless there is another set of rule books for foreigners.
August 1st, 2011 at 2:26 pm
It is now reported by Fox News that a tax increase could easily be on the table in November under this plan. Indeed, the Bush tax cut could be let to expire as a means of adding revenue by the new Congressional gang of 12 . See guys, the devil is in the details
CraigS
August 1st, 2011 at 2:26 pm
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-debt-ceiling-romney-gop-20110801,0,69077.story
This article up at RCP from the LA Times is a decent write up about Romney’s statement of opposition to the bill.
August 1st, 2011 at 2:29 pm
CraigS,
Even if that is true, then the House shoots it down, and the automatic cuts go into effect.
August 1st, 2011 at 2:53 pm
“If you took Obama’s plan and Romney’s plan, and just met in the middle, you’d be in
the middle of nowhere.” -The Washington Examiner’s Tim Carney
August 1st, 2011 at 2:56 pm
Tele, stop quoting people and come up with your own thoughts. No one with a personality and any sort of ability to think critically is going to change their mind based on what some media-type hack says about a politician.
August 1st, 2011 at 3:26 pm
Have we reached 200 comments yet?
August 1st, 2011 at 4:05 pm
Six,
No. 182 by my count.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:05 pm
……..no, wait. 183.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:06 pm
NOW, it’s 184! ARGGGGGGGGGH! How do i get ahead of this thing!
August 1st, 2011 at 4:06 pm
………oh, wait a minute….
186.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:07 pm
I can’t believe Romney said this.
Pathetic Mitt.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:16 pm
you tend to me one of the more thoughtfull and thought provoking Palin supporters on here. I have never said that Palin didn’t accomplish anything. I’m sure she did some good things. I just don’t like trying to use a heavily democratic legislature as a justification to leaving your post 1/2 way through.
=================================================
She was in a unusual situation. She ran for the governorship against Republican corruption. As a result she had little support among Republicans in the state legislature. She was forced into a alliance with Democrats to get her agenda passed. After McCain’s loss she had corrupt Republicans and partisan Democrats working to stop and roll back her agenda. She surmised that her Lt Gov could continue the work that she started and stop the Democrats from rolling back what she had already passed. That is exactly what happened. Then you also had the fact that they were abusing the ethics process which was costing her hundreds of thousands and maybe millions if she served out her full term. They were essentially a middle class family and did not have the deep pockets to pay for it.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:25 pm
That is BY FAR the best explanation by a Palin drone I’ve heard for her resignation yet. I don’t know that I can swallow it all as a quality and valid reason – but at least it makes complete sense.
Thank you for putting that in such a way.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:30 pm
MWS
Now it is 190.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:53 pm
I commend Romney for doing the only thing that was consistent with his previous statements. (see No Apology)
He is on the record for maintaining Defense spending at 4% of GDP, and this bill put that at risk. (See James Pethakoukis’ remarks following his trip to China. “I’d hate to negotiate with them with anything other than military superiority.)
He is on record that spending should be less than 20% of GDP. This bill cuts a scrawny $7 billion in 2012. It sends NO message to the businesses that DC is serious about reining in spending. It sends no message to the analysts, making capital more expensive. It is a jobs destroyer.
He is on the record that he would NOT raise taxes, yet this agreement will likely do just that. Harry Reid is already backing away from the no taxes commitment.
He did not grandstand the issue. He let the elected leaders work out the best compromise they could. And then he waited until it was reasonably assured that there would be enough support from both sides to pass it, avoiding default.
But he also pinned the issue on Obama and his lack of leadership, and assured everyone that he would run against him on the issue of spending, taxes, and deficit.
Well done, Governor Romney.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:54 pm
Matt, you are shamelessly spamming this site. Knock it off.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:57 pm
Do any other Romney fans want to weigh in on Huntsman and his statements regarding the debt-ceiling plan? Jaxemer11 has written that Huntsman is really not trying to win the nomination but rather angling for a high cabinet post in the Romney administration, such as Sec. of State. However, his statement in a recent statement about his opponents, he seems to be taking a swipe at Romney.
August 1st, 2011 at 4:59 pm
*in his recent statement about his opponents*
August 1st, 2011 at 5:05 pm
I wonder how many votes Romney lost by doing this wait and see answer?
How many voters, who were hoping for Huckabee, Daniels, Pence, Barbour, or Christie and were resigned that it probably would be Romney, have now decided that they could not vote for Romney after all?
Will those voters stay home or now throw their support behind the anti-Mitt?
Is the Anybody but Mitt vote now much stronger?
August 1st, 2011 at 5:09 pm
Matt Lewis had a great pic with his article today:
http://i454.photobucket.com/albums/qq269/mklpolitics/MittMilk.jpg?t=1312201379
August 1st, 2011 at 5:10 pm
If you and the other RomNots on RACE all keep beating their drums constantly about their anti-Mitt rhetoric they may be able to garner a few more anti-Romney folks to the various other camps.
Not sure if this does anything though. But it is fun to watch the RomNots try to make something of it.
August 1st, 2011 at 5:18 pm
#195 – It would be nice to hear from voters who are undecided. Most folks here have formed an opinion about Romney and this statement, as is the case with most things he does, either inspires confidence or reinforces his image as gutless and opportunistic.
But I hope everyone can be intellectually honest and recognize Romney’s statement as pure BS. And here’s why. Romney says he would have produced a budget – not a budget deal – but a budget that was balanced. Even Rand Paul said its impossible to balance the budget right now. So the idea that Romney could balance the budget is worse than fiction, its a falsehood.
August 1st, 2011 at 5:25 pm
198. I think there are legit reasons to be concerned with Romney’s stance and timing, but not that.
Rand Paul is right. No one could balance the budget right now with things as the are–it’d even likely be impossible to actually pass a BBA in such a short time frame. Obama, though, has been President going on three years. Had another President been focused during that time, it would have been difficult, but potentially doable in a series of steps to balance the budget.
August 1st, 2011 at 5:26 pm
“But I hope everyone can be intellectually honest and recognize Romney’s statement as pure BS.
LOL
Because you haven’t made up your mind right?
Obama hasn’t been working on the budget, he looked the other way and waited until the last minute to give a token care. Romney is a numbers man. He’ll have someone on that the second his foot hits the front porch. “Impossible to balance the budget RIGHT NOW” Possibly so in the current state of affairs, but permanently impossible? impossible with someone skilled in that discipline….? The question is could Romney deliver something better than Obama? I believe a lot of people could, including ones here from this site.
Fiction/falsehood – that’s your story and that’s all it is, a story.
August 1st, 2011 at 5:29 pm
In case you missed it, this is an interesting approval tracker from USA today, it’s surprising, among other things, how very popular GHW Bush & W were due to their wars, then how very unpopular they became later in their presidencies.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/presidential-approval-tracker.htm
August 1st, 2011 at 5:38 pm
Do we know which of the candidates have actually weighed in on this final version that’s going up for a vote? I know some have commented at various points, e.g. Bachmann made it clear at the beginning that whatever they come up with, she’s against it. Huntsman is in favor. Perry likes cut, cap, and balance, but we don’t know whether he’s interested in taking a stance on this final version. I’m not sure about the others. I know Palin FB comment, but am not sure if that is intended to include this version–it probably does.
August 1st, 2011 at 5:40 pm
This is an interesting breakdown on the debt deal…
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/08/01/4-ways-debt-deal-betrays-conservatives-and-short-changes-america/
August 1st, 2011 at 5:41 pm
mac,
That is a super cool link in 201. Have you done the comparison? Thus far, Obama has actually tracked Reagan fairly well. Trouble for Barack is that he is not about the inflection point where Reagan’s approval took a steady rise. I’m not seeing that for O.
August 1st, 2011 at 5:43 pm
Reagan’s numbers in the spring of 1983 should also give us pause lest we become too confident about beating Obama.
August 1st, 2011 at 5:44 pm
MWS, you beat me to it in 204! I should’ve hit refresh before posting 205!
August 1st, 2011 at 5:46 pm
204.
Anyway, as usual, I agree with more with you than myself;)!
August 1st, 2011 at 5:48 pm
Let’s try that again…as usual, I agree more with you than myself;)!
August 1st, 2011 at 6:03 pm
mac,
If you had to choose between Bachmann, Perry, and Romney, who would you choose?
As a followup, if you had to die by quartering, getting filleted, or an acid bath, which would you choose?
August 1st, 2011 at 6:06 pm
On second thought, this field of GOP candidates has 2nd term written all over it. Mitt will win the nomination by default, but he has major league issues with both the base and downscale voters.
August 1st, 2011 at 6:09 pm
Bachmann, Perry and Romney?
See, there in lies the problem.
Most voters would be asking for a do over.
August 1st, 2011 at 6:12 pm
#199 – The only way to have balanced the budget would have been a combination of huge tax hikes, deep budget cuts including defense, and probably pulling out of Afghanistan two years ago. If that is what Romney is proposing his chances of even getting the nomination is slimmer than I thought.
August 1st, 2011 at 6:12 pm
MWS,
Wow, talk about a nightmare scenario, I’d probably vote for Bachmann in the primary secretly hoping that Mitt knocks her off. I’d take the acid bath over Perry. How about you?
August 1st, 2011 at 6:16 pm
If I felt assured that Jeb or Tom Ridge would be her running mate, I’d feel a lot better about Bachmann.
August 1st, 2011 at 6:52 pm
Of course, Huck on anyone’s ticket makes all the difference in the world for me and Mitt is most likely to make that a reality (although I know it’s a long-shot).
August 1st, 2011 at 7:01 pm
ANY Balanced Budget Amendment would have to be phased in. No country could go into a cold turkey scenario where the budget was balanced with Draconian Ciuts across the board. Every constituency in the country would be at the barricades. ideally, it would be phased in , over time, coincident with one or more of the following:
1. A complete re- work of our stultifying tax code. Perhaps a flat tax or a VAT on top of a vastly simplified code that eliminated a couple of tons of special tax breaks.
2. A tax holiday that allows companies to ” repatriate” their cash stored in Zurich and Milan on a one time tax break.
3. A entitlements reform to raise the Medicare / SS age to 67 and the SS tax rate to 150,000. Also, a means test for SS and Medicare
4. A SUBSTANTIAL draw down of U.S military from non combat areas like Germany.
This is how you get to a real business stimulus where the stock market rockets up and everybody wins
CraigS
August 1st, 2011 at 7:03 pm
MWS,
Don’t leave me hanging, your turn.
August 1st, 2011 at 7:07 pm
#122 – Excellent.
That is THE definitive response to the RomNots on this issue.
The rest is just an excuse for the Romnots to have their daily orgy.
August 1st, 2011 at 7:09 pm
mac,
I’d take my kidneys being eaten out by hyenas. then Romney, then Bachmann, then getting a barbed wire enema, then Perry, then being banished to a room full of vegetarian lasagna, then Obama.
August 1st, 2011 at 7:10 pm
Doug,
“That is THE definitive response to the RomNots on this issue.”
Really? RomNots like Watch?
I called out TPaw on this thread for his silence.
August 1st, 2011 at 7:10 pm
lol
August 1st, 2011 at 7:18 pm
mac,
The only thing worse than lasagna is vegetarian lasagna.
Those are just a few of the words I live by……..
August 1st, 2011 at 7:22 pm
Doug,
Be honest now……. Doesn’t this response seem more like Romney ’08 than Romney ’12?
August 1st, 2011 at 7:33 pm
Wow, if it becomes Romney versus Bachmann on Super Tuesday after Michelle sweeps the “keys” (IA, SC, FL), these boards will be fun!
Me against EVERYBODY. CAN’T WAIT to debate honorary Rombots – Matt, Mac, Granny T, and TC
August 1st, 2011 at 7:39 pm
Not to mention, additional new Rombots at that point – Smacks, Telly, Franklin, and France’s very own, Monsieur Texcel.
August 1st, 2011 at 7:41 pm
Craig,
Have you ever stopped to wonder why none of the Huckanuts you listed there have gotten on board with Bachmann, despite the obvious SoCon connection?
If you’re curious, you can ask us…..
August 1st, 2011 at 7:41 pm
That Romney will be one popular dude!
August 1st, 2011 at 7:48 pm
Matt,
Lotsa Bachmann fans at Huck’s Army. Check it out sometime. They love her appearances on Huckabee and how Mike treats her. Many, many, many trust and Rollin’s and Alice’s (Michele’s spokeslady who was Huck’s)judgements.
Back in OC, Cali we’ve got all we need ever since Bachmann visited with us at the Ritz Carlton.
And lastly, We’re using tons of Huck folks and connections in IOWA, as you can imagine by her great numbers there.
August 1st, 2011 at 7:51 pm
Granny T will be won over. I think she’s leaning to the mother of 28
August 1st, 2011 at 7:53 pm
Matt,
But I must admit, you Romney folks will be formidable.
August 1st, 2011 at 7:56 pm
AND if Romney prevails over Michele one on one in a hard fought primary battle all the way to Tampa BUT then loses to Obama, guess who will be next in line?
August 1st, 2011 at 7:58 pm
Hint #1: It won’t be T-Paw
August 1st, 2011 at 8:20 pm
Craig,
It sure as hell ain’t going to be Michele.
In fact, I’ll bet you 76 respect points that you aren’t even shilling for her by the time Iowa votes.
August 1st, 2011 at 8:31 pm
Craig For Losers,
You wasted several years of your life talking nonsense and stupidity
supporting liberal preacher from Arkansas,non stop on this site.
Tell me,how many thousands of hours of your obviously non eventful life
went down the sewer the moment Huckster admited defeat?
Tell me,how many thousands of worthless hours you wasted on Huckster?
Now you have about at least 10 times worse candidate,10 times the loser,
total nut job whacko or is it a flake,according to Chris Wallas?
Hey,another
August 1st, 2011 at 8:54 pm
188. take creative writing on high school? Must have, because that truly was a creative explanation. “Everyone was corrupt but her..” Sorry, the truth is much simpler and much easier to prove. She quit to chase and worship the almighty dollar.
August 1st, 2011 at 8:57 pm
#231 – Wow, hadn’t thought of that.
August 1st, 2011 at 9:18 pm
Matt MWS – After that comment – most of what I read seemed redundant, off topic (Palin, her resignation, etc. –gag, wretch) or piling on.
Below are two reponses I wrote on this subject over at http://www.rightspeak.net responding to this thread:
http://www.rightspeak.net/2011/08/mitt-romney-i-personally-cannot-support.html
————–
Romney was first in line to sign Cut, Cap and Balance. He’s been calling for such policies since his book came out. (See Closer To Home’s eloquent summation on this thread)
As CraigS summarized earlier on this thread, and which many of us did so last week as well, the 2012ers don’t need to be popping off on this issue, since it was in constant flux.
Romney didn’t support the Boehner Plan last week, he applauded Boehner for holding firm on raising taxes. That is different thing entirely, but some Romnots are to0 obtuse to get that.
Nobody likes this bill and even those elected officials who have to vote for it, I doubt really like it.
So what do we have?
Romney staking out his positions in his book, committing to them by signing the CCB pledge.
He issues a supportive statement for not raising taxes in a lousy economy.
He’s avoided looking like a fool for commenting on negotiations he didn’t have all the info on.
He issued a statement he’s disappointed in the bill, forced on us, because the President failed to lead on the issue.
I think he played it straight and perfect. If he injected himeslf anyother way in to the debate it would have backfired on him.
And I also wrote:
Personally I don’t care for candidates injecting themselves into these types of insider baseball games. It’s the elected officals duty, they’ll work it out. When all is said done, the ones who want their job can sound off.
As I said last week, if I was a Boehner or Reid or anyone else involved in the back and forth, and a reporter asked me if I had any reaction to what some 2012ers aid or suggested, it wouldn’t be fit to print.
I just don’t think this is a big issue – the deal that is. The underlying issues are genuine and of concern, which is what the 2012 election will about.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:01 pm
Sarah Palin tonight on Greta just came off as more reasonable and less dogmatic about “the deal” than Mitt Romney.
Who would have thunk it?
August 1st, 2011 at 10:38 pm
Sarah Palin was great and very Presidential on Greta tonight.
August 1st, 2011 at 10:43 pm
Was Romney’s statement done only to please Jim DeMint and get that SC primary endorsement??
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/08/01/source-demint-might-back-primary-challenges-against-republicans-who-supported-deal/
August 1st, 2011 at 10:45 pm
ilfigo please cite evidence for your statement that Romney supported the Boehner plan? He said nothing (wisely btw). Then he went out of his way to reject the compromise. At the precise moment when he could have been statesmanlike and supported the bill which contrary to what his handlers obviously told him in fact would have probably made his victory all the more assured. More importantly it would have helped him in the general. Obama will be giggling like a school kid tonight.
Romney did NOT support the original Boehner plan then reject the compromise. But if he did he would be about the only person? Who else has taken this strange view? Boehner out negotiated Obama AND starved off possible economic disaster – and yet you praise Romney for dissing the plan?
You also have no support for your bold claim that Romney would have voted for the bill (despite in fact directly implying the opposite). If that is Romney’s view he should have said exactly that.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:10 pm
Craig,
The primary reason why most HucksArmy people do not support Bachmann is because she lacks executive experience.
But the reason they would not back Romney is because he lacks conviction and political courage-which Bachmann has in spades.
Romney does have executive experience, but his actual governing experience is not a winner-he left office with an approval rating of 34% and would not have been re-elected.
So, don’t have us jumping on the Romney bandwagon….as many of us might just prefer to walk.
August 1st, 2011 at 11:28 pm
Texas Conservative,
Craig For Losers has no compass or principles.
T-Paw at one time was his #2 choice after Huck.
Today,he’s calling the man every nasty name in the book.
Go figure!
He spent thousands of hours repeating on this site that Huckabee
had 10 1/2 years experience as governor etc…..
Today he’s supporting a nut job whacko with no record and zero
accomplishments.
Go figure!
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:17 am
Sarah Palin tonight on Greta just came off as more reasonable and less dogmatic about “the deal” than Mitt Romney.
================================================
I think she struck the proper tone when she said it was a small victory. I’ve seen some Repubublicans doing the equivalent of spiking the football. Paul Ryan was trying to say that there are real spending cuts in this. Interesting enough Lindsay Graham came on Greta and contradicted Paul Ryan.
August 2nd, 2011 at 4:19 am
Paul Ryan, sniveling Eric Cantor, and Boehner now must prop up this bill or they will earn the ire of America for holding us hostage for the equivalent of a hot pocket. And how foolish of Boenher to claim he hot 90% of what he wanted, taking complete ownership of it whereas Obama said it wasn’t the deal he wanted. The media is so stupid and gullible that they think Obama gave away the store. Please. He gave away a free sample. David Stockman was on CNN and said republicans are mocking Reagan by invoking his name during this debate because there is nothing Reaganesque about this petty deal.
And as for Romney, I have figured out what he and Harry Potter have in common. In the final book Harry receives a gift from Dumbledore that has the inscription, “I open at the close.” Well that’s Romney’s mouth. When the deal is closed his mouth finally opens.
August 2nd, 2011 at 8:29 am
#245 Also like Harry Potter, his take on the problem has been put in writing and published and a New York Times bestseller.
November 10th, 2011 at 8:13 pm
Thanks a bunch for sharing this with all folks you actually recognise what you’re speaking about! Bookmarked. Kindly also seek advice from my website =). We could have a link alternate arrangement between us